New  Light  on  Don  Diego  de  Penalosa: 

Proof  that  he  never  made  an  Expedi- 

tion from  Santa  Fe  to  Quivira  and 

the  Mississippi  River  in  1662 


BY 

CHARLES  W.  HACKETT 


Reprinted  from  the  MISSISSIPPI 
VALLEY  HISTORICAL  REVIEW 
Vol.  VI,  December,  1919 


Bancroft  Library 


NEW  LIGHT  ON  DON  DIEGO  DE  PENALOSA:  PEOOF 

THAT  HE  NEVEE  MADE  AN  EXPEDITION 

FROM  SANTA  FE  TO  QUIVIRA  AND  THE 

MISSISSIPPI  EIVEE  IN  1662  x 

Between  the  years  1678  and  1684  Don  Diego  Dionisio  de  Pena- 
losa  Briceno  y  Berdugo,  a  discredited  and  exiled  governor  of 
the  province  of  New  Mexico  in  New  Spain,  made  his  three  well- 
known  proposals  to  Louis  xiv  to  attack  New  Spain  in  the  name 
of  France.  The  first  of  these  propositions,  presented  in  1678, 
looked  toward  the  conquest  of  the  region  to  the  northeast  and 
east  of  New  Mexico,  known  as  Quivira  and  Tegago  (Teguayo),2 
probably  the  region  between  modern  Wichita,  Kansas,  and  the 
Wichita  mountains  in  the  present  state  of  Oklahoma.3  The 
second  proposal,  made  in  1682,  called  for  the  founding  of  a 
French  settlement  at  the  mouth  of  the  Eio  Bravo  (Eio  Grande).4 
In  the  third  proposal,  presented  two  years  later  and  at  exactly 

1  This  paper  was  read  at  the  annual  meeting  of  the  Mississippi  valley  historical 
association  in  St.  Louis,  May  8,  1919. 

2  '  '  Real  eedula  comunicando  al  virey  de  Nueva  Espana,  pidiendo  inf  orme  acerca 
del  reino  de  Quivira,"  in  Fernandez  Duio^Don  Diego  de  Penalosa,  y  su  descubri- 
miento  del  reino  de  Quivira:  inf  orme  presentado  d  la  Real  academia  de  la  historia 
(Madrid,  1882),  50  ff. 

3  Herbert  E.  Bolton,  Spanish  exploration  in  the  southwest,  1542-1706  (New  York, 
1916),  205;  F.  W.  Hodge,  note,  in  Benavides,  Memorial  of  1630  (Ayer  translation  — 
Chicago,  1916),  278. 

*  '  '  M4moire  pour  Mgr.  le  marquis  de  Seignelay,  touchant  1  'establissement  d  'une 
nouvelle  colonie  dans  la  Floride,  dans  Pembouchure  de  la  riviere  appelee  Bio-Bravo, 
et  les  avantages  qui  en  peuvent  revenir  au  roy  et  a  ses  sujets,"  in  Pierre  Margry, 
Decouvertes  et  etdblissements  des  Frangais  dans  I'ouest  et  dans  le  sud  de  I'Am&rique, 
Septentrionale  (Paris,  1879),  3:  44  ff.  ;  English  translation  nr'John  G.  Shea,  The  ex- 
pedition of  Don  Diego  Dionisio  de  P&nalosa,  governor  of  New  Mexico,  from  Santa  Fe 
to  the  river  Mischipi  and  Quivira  m  1662  (New  York,  1882),  12. 


"7 


314  Charles  W.  HacJcett  M.  v.  H.  R. 

the  same  time  that  La  Salle  was  making  preparations  to  found  a 
settlement  at  the  mouth  of  the  Mississippi  river,  Penalosa  of- 
fered to  seize  Panuco  (Tampico),  and  make  it  a  base  for  the 
conquest  of  the  adjacent  rich  mining  province  of  Nueva  Vizcaya.5 
As  a  result  of  the  international  importance  attached  to  Pena- 
losa 7s  proposals,  his  activities  after  leaving  New  Spain  —  his 
sojourn  in  England,  his  later  residence  in  Paris,  and  the  ques- 
tion of  his  connection  with  the  La  Salle  expedition  to  the  Texas 
coast  —  have  been  carefully  investigated  and  their .  significance 
pointed  out  by  students  of  French  and  Spanish  colonization  in 
America.6  Of  Penalosa 's  activities  in  America,  however,  es- 
pecially his  record  as  governor  of  New  Mexico  and  his  trial  and 
exile  by  the  tribunal  of  the  holy  office  of  the  inquisition,  prac- 
tically nothing  has  heretofore  been  written.  In  1879,  the  French 
historian,  Margry,  published  what  is  apparently  a  brief  auto- 
biographical sketch  of  Penalosa,7  and  this,  until  recently,  has 
constituted  the  chief  unquestioned  source  for  his  career  prior 
to  his  exile  from  New  Spain.  Yet  so  brief  is  this  sketch  that 
Houck,  the  well-known  historian  of  Missouri,  writing  in  1908, 
says:  ".Very  little  is  known  about  his  administration  of  New 
Mexico  while  he  was  governor  and  captain-general  of  the  prov- 
ince. ' ' 8  The  same  year,  Lea  in  his  admirable  study,  The  in- 
quisition in  the  Spanish  dependencies,  thus  dismisses  the  Pena- 
losa episode:  "Another  Governor  of  New  Mexico,  Diego  de 
Penalosa,  fared  even  worse  when,  for  indiscreet  words  about 
priests  and  inquisitors  and  expressions  verging  on  blasphemy, 
he  was  exposed  to  the  humiliation  of  appearing  as  a  penitent  in 

5"Memoire  sur  les  affaires  de  1  'Amerique, "  in  Margry,  Decouvertes  et  etablisse- 
ments  des  Frangais,  3 :  48  ff . ;  English  translation  in  Shea,  Expedition  of  Don  Diego 
Dionisio  de  Penalosa  from  Santa  Fe  to  the  river  Mischipi  and  Quivira  in  1662,  16  ff. 

6  See  William  E.  Dunn,  Spanish  and  French  rivalry  in  the  gulf  region  of  the  United 
States,  1678-1702:  the  beginnings  of  Texas  and  P&nsacola   (Austin,  1917),  13  ff.; 
Herbert  E.  Bolton,  "The  Spanish  occupation  of  Texas,  1519-1690,"  in  Southwestern 
historical  quarterly,  16:  6,  17,  and  "Notes  on  'dark's  Beginnings  of  Texas,'  "  in 
Texas  state  historical  association,  The  quarterly,  12:  151  ff.;  E.  T.  Miller,  "The  con- 
nection of  Penalosa  with  the  LaSalle  expedition,"  ibid.,  5:  97  ff.;  E.  Daenell,  Die 
Spanier  in  Nordamerilca  von  1513-1814  (Munich  and  Berlin,  1911),  99  ff. 

7  "Notice  sur  le  Comte  de  Penalosa,"  in  Margry,  Decouvertes  et  etablissements 
des  Frangais,  3 :  39  ff . ;   translation  in  Shea,  Expedition  of  Don  Diego  Dionisio  de 
Penalosa  from  Santa  Fe  to  the  river  Mischipi  and  Quivira  in  1662,  8  ff . 

s  Louis  Houck,  A  history  of  Missouri  from  the  earliest  explorations  and  settlements 
until  the  admission  of  the  state  into  the  union  (Chicago,  1908),  1:  141. 


Vol.  vi,  NO.  3  j)on  i}ie0  de  Penalosa  315 


the  auto  de  fe  of  February  3,  1668  —  thus  virtually  incapacita- 
ting him  for  further  service.  '  '  9 

At  the  court  of  Louis  xiv,  Peiialosa  capitalized  his  personal 
knowledge  of  the  regions  mentioned  in  his  three  proposals.  In 
1684,  at  the  time  that  he  offered  to  seize  Panuco,  he  presented  to 
Monsieur  de  Seignelay,  French  minister  of  marine,  a  manuscript 
'  i  Eelacion,  '  '  10  purporting  to  be  an  account  of  an  expedition  made 
by  himself  in  1662,  while  governor  of  New  Mexico,  to  Quivira 
and  beyond  to  the  "Mischipi"  river11  —  a  stream  thought  by 
Houck  to  have  been  the  Mississippi,12  by  Shea  to  have  been  the 
Missouri  river.13  This  "  Eelacion,  "  according  to  its  title  page, 
was  written  by  Father  Nicolas  de  Freytas,  one  of  the  Francis- 
can missionaries  of  New  Mexico  and  the  governor's  chaplain. 

The  Freytas  "Eelacion"  was  published  for  the  first  time  by 
John  G-ilmary  Shea  in  1882.  Taking  it  as  his  authority,  which 
he  in  no  wise  questioned,  Shea  hailed  Penalosa  as  a  great  ex- 
plorer of  the  Quivira  region.14Among  scholars  at  large,  however, 
the  publication  of  the  "Eelacion"  aroused  great  speculation. 
In  Spain,  the  Real  academia  de  la  historia  instructed  one  of  its 
members,  the  erudite  Fernandez  Duro,  to  investigate  and  report 
upon  its  authenticity.  As  a  result  of  this  investigation,  Duro,  be- 
fore the  end  of  the  year  1882,  published  as  his  report  a  book 
entitled:  Don  Diego  de  Penalosa,  y  su  descubrimiento  del  reino 
de  Quivira:  informe  presentado  a  la  Real  academia  de  la  his- 
toria.^ In  this  book  no  definite  facts  are  presented  and  no 
documentary  material  is  cited  which  positively  disprove  the  al- 
leged expedition  of  Penalosa  in  1662.  Duro,  however,  after 

9  Henry  C.  Lea,  The  inquisition  in  the  Spanish  dependencies;  Sicily  —  Naples  — 
Sardinia  —  Milan  —  the  Canaries  —  Mexico  —  Peru  —  New  Granada  (New  York, 
1908),  256. 

10  '  '  Relacion  del  descubrimiento  del  pais  y  ciudad  de  Quivira  echo  por  D.  Diego 
Dionisio  de  Penalosa     .     .     .     escrita  por  el  Padre  Fr.  Nicolas  de  Freytas,  '  '  in  Shea, 
Expedition  of  Don  Diego  Dionisio  de  Penalosa  from  Santa  Fe  to  the  river  Mischipi 
and  Quivira  in  1662,  25  ff.;  and  in  Duro,  Don  Diego  de  Penalosa,  y  su  descubrimiento 
del  reino  de  Quivira,  33  ff. 

11  Ibid.  •  Shea,  Expedition  of  Don  Diego  Dionisio  de  Penalosa  from  Santa  Fe  to  the 
river  Mischipi  and  Quivira  in  1662,  5,  7,  25. 

12  Houck,  History  of  Missouri,  1  :  146. 

13  Shea,  Expedition  of  Don  Diego  Dionisio  de  Penalosa  from  Santa  Fe  to  the  river 
Mischipi  and  Quivira  in  1362,  5. 

i*  Hid. 

is  See  note  2. 


316  Charles  W.  Hackett  M- v- H- R- 

considerable  investigation  in  archive  and  printed  source  mate- 
rial, some  of  which  he  published,  in  addition  to  the  Spanish  text 
of  the  Freytas  "Kelacion,"  give s~  his  conclusions  as  follows: 
first,  that  Penalosa  did  not  make  such  an  expedition  at  all; 
second,  that  Father  Freytas  did  not  write  the  "Relacion"; 
and  third,  that  Penalosa  forged  the  work,  adding  the  name  of 
Freytas  when  he  moved  to  Paris  in  1673. 16  Likewise,  in  America 
H.  H.  Bancroft  in  1884  —  independently,  as  he  claims,  of  Duro  — 
came  to  the  conclusion  that  the  whole  narrative  was  a  fabrica- 
tion, founded  on  Onate's  expedition  nearly  sixty  years  earlier, 
and  that  Penalosa  never  made  any  such  expedition.17 

Since  the  time  of  Duro  and  Bancroft  no  attempt  has  been 
made,  so  far  as  is  known,  to  prove  or  to  disprove  the  authenticity 
of  the  Freytas  "Relacion"  and  the  claim  made  therein  that 
Penalosa  made  an  expedition  from  Santa  Fe  in  1662  to  what  is 
now  eastern  Kansas  and  southern  Missouri.  True,  most  scholars 
have  held  to  the  belief  that  Penalosa  never  made  the  expedition.18 
For  lack  of  positive  proof,  however,  no  one  since  the  Freytas 
"Relacion"  was  published  in  1882  has  hitherto  been  able  to 
speak  with  certainty  on  this  subject.  Houck,  though  taking  into 
account  the  fact  that  the  "Relacion"  generally  has  been  dis- 
credited, says :  ' '  Without  attempting  to  decide  as  to  the  truth- 
fulness of  Padre  Freytas'  narrative  of  this  expedition  of  Pena- 
losa, we  cannot  well  omit  to  give  its  details  as  recorded  by  him, 

is  Duro,  Don  Diego  de  Penalosa,  y  su  descubrimiento  del  reino  de  Quivira,  49. 

17  Hubert  H.  Bancroft,  History  of  the  North  Mexican  states  and  Texas  (San 
Francisco,  1884),  1:  386,  and  Arizona  and  New  Mexico  (San  Francisco,  1889),  21, 
24,  169.  Bancroft  arrived  at  these  conclusions  chiefly  as  a  result  of  the  fact  that  no 
mention  is  made  of  an  expedition  by  Penalosa  to  the  eastern  region  in  the  famous 
report  of  Father  Posadas,  written  shortly  after  1685.  Posadas  was  custodio  of  the 
Franciscan  missions  and  comisario  of  the  tribunal  of  the  inquisition  during  the  ad-, 
ministration  of  Penalosa  in  New  Mexico,  and  the  report  which  he  made  at  the  request 
of  the  viceroy  deals  chiefly  with  the  region  to  the  north  and  east  of  New  Mexico.  His 
failure  to  mention  an  expedition  by  Penalosa  at  a  time  when  he  himself  was  living  in 
New  Mexico  is  excellent  circumstantial  evidence  that  Penalosa  never  made  the  expedi- 
tion which  he  alleges  to  have  made.  Such  evidence,  however,  is  only  circumstantial. 
Posadas  might  have  purposely  omitted  any  reference  to  the  expedition,  for,  as  will 
be  seen  later,  he  and  Penalosa  were  the  bitterest  of  enemies.  See  '  <  Inf orme  a  S.  M. 
sobre  las  tierras  de  Nuevo  Mejico,  Quivira  y  Teguayo,"  in  Duro,  Don  Diego  de 
Penalosa,  y  su  descubrimiento  del  reino  de  Quivira,  53  ff.;  Dunn,  Spanish  and  French 
rivalry  in  the  gulf  region  of  the  United  States,  63. 

i«Bolton,  "The  Spanish  occupation  of  Texas,"  in  Southwestern  historical  quar- 
terly, 16:  7. 


Vol.  vi,  NO.  3  j)on  j)iego  de  penalosa  317 

leaving  the  reader  to  judge  of  the  intrinsic  probability  of  at  least 
some  of  the  main  features  of  this  narrative/'19  Then,  with  the 
"Belacion"  as  his  guide,  Houck  attempts  to  locate  in  a  general 
way  the  regions  and  rivers  mentioned  in  the  narrative.  Conclud- 
ing, he  says :  ' '  The  fact  that  the  narrative  of  Freytas  exagger- 
ates and  magnifies  the  discoveries  and  population  of  the  coun- 
tries through  which  he  says  Penalosa  marched  is  in  and  of  itself 
not  sufficient  reason  for  us  to  discredit  this  expedition  en- 
tirely. "20 

It  is  purposed  now,  however,  to  show  positively  that  Penalosa 
never  made  an  expedition  eastward  from  New  Mexico  in  1662. 
It  is  also  purposed  to  relate,  for  the  first  time,  some  of  the  epi- 
sodes in  his  troubled  administration,  and  to  supplement  and  cor- 
rect Lea's  brief  statement  concerning  his  trial  by  the  inquisition, 
the  outcome  of  which  trial  made  him,  when  later  a  veritable 
empire  —  the  Mississippi  valley  itself — was  at  stake,  the  cause 
of  the  deepest  concern  to  two  of  the  oldest  and  proudest  courts 
of  Europe. 

In  this  connection  a  brief  bibliographical  note  is  in  order.  In 
1912,  while  searching  in  the  archives  of  Mexico,  the  late  Mr. 
Adolph  F.  Bandelier  made  transcripts  of  a  great  many  of  the 
papers  of  the  inquisition.  Among  these  papers  were  documents 
dealing  with  the  trial  and  conviction  of  Don  Diego  de  Penalosa 
for  blasphemy,  impeding  the  jurisdiction  of  the  inquisition,  and 
other  crimes.  After  the  death  of  Bandelier,  who  had  been  able 
by  a  special  grant  from  the  Carnegie  institution  of  Washington 
to  continue  his  investigations  in  Seville,  Spain,  his  transcripts 
of  the  inquisition  papers,  and  many  others,  were  entrusted  to 
the  present  writer  to  translate  and  edit  for  publication  for  the 
Carnegie  institution.21  The  inquisition  papers,  referred  to 
above,  throw  much  interesting  and  valuable  light  upon  the  ac- 
tivities of  Penalosa  and  his  predecessor,  Don  Bernardo  Lopez 
de  Mendizabal,  as  governors  of  New  Mexico.  The  utilization  of 
these  transcripts  by  the  writer  has  made  possible  this  paper, 

19  Houck,  History  of  Missouri,  1 :  142. 

20  Hid.,  1:  143. 

21  See.  J.  Franklin  Jameson,  "Annual  report  of  the  director  of  the  department  of 
historical  research,"  in  Carnegie  institution  of  Washington,  Tear  book  number  17, 
for  the  year  1918  (Washington,  1919),  145. 


318  Charles  W.  HacJcett  M.  v.  H.  R. 

which  may  be  regarded  as  the  first  fruits  of  the  final  labors  of 
the  lamented  Bandelier  in  the  archives  of  Mexico  and  Spain. 

On  December  24,  1658,  Don  Bernardo  Lopez  de  Mendizabal, 
newly-appointed  governor  of  New  Mexico,  left  Mexico  City  for 
Santa  Fe.  Accompanying  him  were  the  custodio,  Fray  Juan 
Eamirez,  Fray  Nicolas  de  Freytas,  Fray  Miguel  de  Guebara, 
and  sixteen  other  Franciscan  missionaries.22  Of  Freytas,  who 
was  then  but  twenty-four  years  old,  and  of  Guebara,  more  will 
be  heard  ;  Father  Freytas  is  the  reputed  author  of  the  so-called 
Freytas  *  '  Relacion,  '  '  Father  Guebara  is  named  in  the  "Rela- 
cion" as  chaplain  of  the  Quivira  expedition.  En  route  to  New 
Mexico  there  were  many  quarrels  between  Mendizabal  and  the 
religious.23  Mendizabal  made  many  claims  to  extraordinary 
powers,  and  even  pretended  to  have  secret  instructions  from 
Viceroy  Albuquerque  to  strangle  or  hang  the  religious  or  to 
banish  them  ignominiously  from  the  province.^  In  July,  1659, 
Mendizabal  and  his  retinue  reached  Santa  Fe,25  where  he  was  to 
exercise  the  duties  of  governor  until  the  latter  part  of  1661. 
During  this  period  Mendizabal  completely  alienated  all  classes 
save  a  few  of  his  own  favorites  and  appointees.  Especially 
did  he  antagonize  and  persecute  the  religious.  So  serious,  in 
fact,  w^as  his  persecution  of  this  group  that  he  came  to  be  called 
Attila  by  everyone,26  and  within  a  year  after  his  arrival  the 
missionaries  had  decided,  provided  no  relief  should  be  forthcom- 
ing, to  consume  the  sacrament  in  all  the  churches  of  the  prov- 
ince and  depart  therefrom.27 

Mendizabal,  however,  was  not  unopposed  in  his  high-handed 
acts  and  presumptuous  claims.  In  particular  did  Fathers  Nico- 

22  "  Testificacion  de  Fray  Nicolas  de  Freytas,  Mexico,  Enero  24,  1661,"  in 
Segundo  quaderno  del  proceso  a  Mendizabal,  63  ff.  (Inquisicion,  A.  G.  M.,  tomo  1660; 
transcript  in  the  Bandelier  collection)  ;  '  '  Primera  audieneia  de  Don  Bernardo  Lopez 
de  Mendizabal,"  f.  143  (Ramo  de  inquisicion,  A.  G.  M.,  tomo  1663;  transcript  in  the 
Bandelier  collection). 


2*  IUd.,  ff.  45,  50. 

25  «  Testificacion  de  Don  Juan  Manso,  Mexico,  13  de  Enero  1661,"  in  Segundo 
quaderno  del  proceso  a  Mendigalal,  f.  46. 

26  <  <  Ratification  de  Miguel  de  Noriega,  Santa  Fe  y  22  de  Septiembre  de  1661,"  in 
Causa  del  fiscal  del  Santo  Oficio  contra  Bernardo  Lopez  de  Mendfealal,"  f.  51  (In- 
quisicion, A.  G.  M.,  tomo  1662;  transcript  in  Bandelier  collection). 

27  "Primera  audieneia  de  Mendizabal,"  f.  53. 


Vol.  vi,  NO.  3  Don  Die0  de  Penalosa  319 


las  de  Freytas  and  Miguel  de  Gruebara  take  issue  with  him.28  In 
June,  1660,  Father  Freytas  charged  Mendizabal  with  having 
publicly  said  that  "he  proposed  to  become  the  only  and  supreme 
head  of  the  church,  "  which,  added  Freytas,  "he  has  fulfilled  so 
far  as  I  am  concerned.  "  This  was  followed  by  Freytas  for- 
mally resigning  his  guardianship  and  ministry.29  Early  in  the 
next  year  he  was  in  Mexico  and  there  he  preferred  many  charges 
before  the  tribunal  of  the  inquisition  against  Mendizabal.30 

Prior  to  this,  however,  the  many  complaints  against  Mendi- 
zabal had  resulted  in  his  recall  by  the  civil  authorities  and  the 
selection  of  Penalosa  as  governor  in  his  stead.  Penalosa  's  com- 
mission as  governor  and  captain-general  of  New  Mexico  was 
issued  at  the  end  of  1660  and  he  proceeded  to  his  charge  in 
1661.31  By  June  of  the  latter  year  the  well-known  mining  town 
of  Cuencame,  in  central  Nueva  Vizcaya,  had  been  reached.32 
With  Penalosa  at  this  time  was  Father  Freytas,  who  was  now 

28  <  '  Declaration  de  Fray  Juan  Ramirez,  Mexico,  Mayo  14  de  1660,  '  '  in  Segundo 
quaderno  a  Mendizabal,  f.  10;  "Audientia,  Febrero  26,  1661y"  in  Causa  contra  Nic- 
olas de  Aguilar,  f.  32  ff.   (Inquisicion,  A.  G.  M.,  tomo  235;  transcript  in  Bandelier 
collection)  . 

29  <  '  Carta  de  Fray  Nicolas  de  Freytas,  Cuarac,  Junio  18  de  1660,  '  '  in  Segundo 
quaderno  a  Mendizabal,  f.  26  ff.;  see  also  "Deposition  de  Nicolas  de  Aguilar,  Mayo 
8  de  1663,"  ibid.,  f.  224. 

so  1  1  Declaracion  de  Fray  Nicolas  de  Freitas,  Mexico  10  de  Enero  1661,  '  '  in  Causa 
contra  Aguilar,  f.  25;  "Audiencia  de  21  de  Febrero  de  1661,  Mexico,"  ibid.,  f.  27; 
'  '  Testification  de  Fray  Nicolas  de  Freitas,  Mexico,  Enero  24,  1661,"  in  Segundo 
quaderno  a  Mendizabal,  f.  63. 

si  "Notice  sur  le  Comte  de  Penalosa,'7  in  Margry,  Decouvertes  et  etablissements 
des  Frangais,  3  :  42  ;  English  translation  in  Shea,  Expedition  of  Don  Diego  Dionisio 
de  Penalosa  from  Santa  Fe  to  the  river  Mischipi  and  Quivira  in  1662,  10.  On  June  25, 
1665,  Penalosa  testified  that  he  was  a  native  of  the  city  of  Lima;  that  his  father  was 
Alonzo  de  Penalosa,  a  resident  of  La  Paz  and  an  encomendero  of  Huarina;  that  he 
was  between  forty-three  and  forty  -four  years  old;  and  that  he  had  been  in  Mexico 
eleven  years.  There  he  had  been  employed  in  the  higher  positions,  political  and 
military,  in  the  king's  service.  '  '  Testification  de  Don  Diego  Dionisio  de  Penalosa 
Briceno.  Mexico,  Junio  25  de  1665,"  in  Segundo  quaderno  a  Mendizabal,  f.  231; 
"Primera  audiencia,  Junio  25  de  1665,"  in  Causa  contra  Don  Diego  Dionisio  de 
Penalosa  Briceno  y  Berdugo,  governador  que  fue  de  Nuevo  Mexico,  por  blasfemo  i 
impedimento  del  uso  del  Santo  oficio  y  otros  delictos,  p.  26  (Inquisition,  A.  G.  M., 
tomo  1663;  transcript  in  Bandelier  collection.  Eeferences  to  this  expediente  are  to 
the  pages  of  the  Bandelier  transcripts,  due  to  the  fact  that,  in  this  case,  Bandelier 
did  not  give  all  the  archive  folio  numbers). 

32  «  Testimonio  de  Juan  de  los  Reyes  Marchena,  Julio  15  de  1661,"  in  Segundo 
quaderno  a  Mendizabal,  f.  160. 


320  Charles  W.  HacJcett  M.  v.  H.  R 

returning  to  New  Mexico,  according  to  claims  advanced  later, 
with  an  order  of  the  tribunal  calling  for  the  arrest  of  Mendiza- 
bal.33  Between  Father  Freytas  and  Governor  Penalosa  there 
was  soon  to  develop  a  friendship  as  marked  as  was  the  hatred  of 
Freytas  for  Mendizabal. 

Mendizabal,  however,  was  not  arrested  upon  the  arrival  of 
Penalosa  and  Freytas,  some  time  after  the  first  of  August,  1661, 
the  latter  apparently  employing  himself  in  secretly  securing 
depositions  to  be  forwarded  to  the  tribunal  of  the  inquisition. 
Just  what  were  the  relations  between  Penalosa  and  his  prede- 
cessor is  not  clear,  but  by  November,  1661,  Penalosa  was  func- 
tioning in  Santa  Fe  as  governor.34  As  was  customary,  after  he 
had  been  inducted  into  office  Penalosa  held  the  residencia  —  an 
official  investigation  into  the  conduct  in  office  —  of  his  prede- 
cessor. If  a  later  statement  by  Penalosa  is  correct,  Mendizabal 
at  this  time  offered  his  successor  6,000  pesos  to  get  him  safely 
through  the  residencies,35  if  one  may  believe  MendizabaPs 
wife,  Penalosa 's  price  was  higher  than  6,000  pesos,  for  when  he 
had  completed  the  residencia  a  messenger  was  sent  to  tell 
Mendizabal  that  if  he  would  give  Penalosa  10,000  pesos,  he 
might  write  the  record  of  the  residencia  as  he  pleased,  and  might 
scratch  out  the  records  as  they  had  been  taken.36 

Some  time  before  holy  week  of  1662,  Penalosa  had  learned  from 
Father  Freytas  and  others  of  the  order  of  the  tribunal  of  the 
inquisition  calling  for  the  arrest  of  Mendizabal  and  the  attach- 
ment of  his  goods.37  At  first  Penalosa  offered  to  assist  Mendi- 
zabal to  flee,  and  even  suggested  to  MendizabaPs  wife  that  for 
one  thousand  pesos  he  would  desist  from  his  persecution.38 
Later,  when  Mendizabal  would  not  consent  to  allowing  his 
goods  to  be  sold  by  Penalosa,  he  was  imprisoned  in  his  own 
house  at  Santa  Fe,  where  a  strong  guard  was  placed  over 

ss  Statement  of  Penalosa,  in  Segundo  quaderno  a  Mendizabal,  f.  160. 

34 « <  Testificacion  de  Don  Diego  Dionisio  de  Penalosa  Briceno,  Mexico,  Junio  25 
de  1665,"  ibid.,  f.  231  ff.;  "Audiencia  de  Julio  1  de  1665,"  in  Causa  contra  Pena- 
losa, p.  22. 

ss « '  Audiencia  de  Diciembre  4  de  1665,"  ibid.,  p.  27. 

se  <  <  Deposicion  de  Teresa  Aguilera  Boche,  muger  de  Mendizabal,  Octubre  5,  1663, ' ' 
ibid.,  p.  3. 

37  "Primera  audiencia  de  Mendizabal,"  ff.  8,  263. 

s&Ibid.,  263;  "Deposicion  de  Teresa  Aguilera  Roche,  muger  de  Mendizabal, 
Octubre  5,  1663,"  in  Causa  contra  Penalosa,  p.  3. 


vol.  vi,  NO.  3  D0n  Diego  de  Penalosa  321 

him ;  afterward  he  was  transferred  from  his  own  house  to 
other  quarters,  and  Penalosa  proceeded  to  sack  the  house  and 
carry  away  for  his  own  use  whatever  suited  his  fancy.39  He 
even  unswung  the  bed,  but  on  returning  from  sacking  the  house 
he  remarked:  "I  leave  there  for  the  inquisitors  over  three 
thousand  pesos;  let  them  be  content  if  they  will,  or  let  them 
seek  for  more  on  Don  Bernardo's  hacienda."40  Not  being  able 
to  blackmail  Mendizabal,  it  is  clear  that  Penalosa 's  object  in  im- 
prisoning him  was  to  get  possession  of  his  property  before  his 
formal  arrest  by  the  inquisition.41  For  it  was  customary  in 
such  cases,  pending  the  outcome  of  the  trial  before  the  tribunal, 
for  the  property  of  the  person  arrested  to  be  attached  in  the 
name  of  the  inquisition.42 

Thus  it  was  that  Penalosa  made  himself  liable  to  the  charge 
of  impeding  and  complicating  the  execution  of  the  decree  of  the 
tribunal.  When  Mendizabal  protested  to  Father  Posadas,  the 
new  Franciscan  custodio  and  comisario  of  the  inquisition,43  and 
asked  that  his  goods  be  restored  to  him,  the  latter  is  said  to 
have  asked  what  recourse  was  possible  "when  Don  Diego  de 
Penalosa  was  governor." 44  The  order  calling  for  Mendizabal 's 
arrest  not  having  been  received  by  Father  Posadas,  he  was 
powerless  to  act. 

At  this  time  Penalosa  is  reputed  to  have  said  that  the  members 
of  the  inquisition  tribunal  were  all  rascals ;  that  if  the  tribunal 
were  present,  not  only  would  he  not  obey  it,  but  he  would  at- 
tack with  a  dagger  any  superior  minister  of  that  body  who 

39  "Primera   audiencia   de   Mendizabal,"   ff.   8,   24,    265;    ' ' Declaration   de   Don 
Bernardo  Lopez  de  Mendizabal,  Mexico,  Abril  28  de  1663, ' '  in  Causa  cotnra  Penalosa, 
p.  1.     Among  the  effects  of  Mendizabal  were  twelve  hundred  skins,  valued  at  about 
twelve  hundred  pesos.     "Declaration  de  Hernando  Martin  Serrano,  Santa  Fe,  Mayo 
21  de  1664,"  ibid.,  p.  15. 

40  '  *  Primera  audiencia  de  Mendizabal, ' '  f .  24. 

41  Penalosa,  ( '  having  notice  of  the  command  of  this  tribunal  to  seize  the  accused 
and  attach  his  goods,  not  only  tried  to  sell  the  accused's  goods,  which  would  have  im- 
peded the  order  of  the  tribunal,  but     .     .     .     did     .     .     .     send  him"   to  another 
prison.     Ibid. 

42  <  t  rphe  inquisition  was  expected  to  become  self-supporting  from   confiscations, 
fines,  and  pecuniary  penances. ' '     Lea,  The  inquisition  in  the  Spanish  dependencies, 
212. 

43  Father  Posadas  arrived  in  New  Mexico  on  April  28,  1661.     ' '  Carta  de  Fray 
Alonso  de  Posadas,  al  Santo  Oficio,  Mayo  23  de  1661, ' '  in  Segundo  quaderno  a 
dizabal,  f.  162. 

**  Ibid. ;  ' '  Primera  audiencia  de  Mendizabal, ' '  f .  24, 


322  Charles  W.  Hackett  M- v- H- B- 

might  oppose  him ;  and  that  he  himself  was  going  to  preside  over 
that  body.  Penalosa  also  boasted  publicly  that  he  had,  under 
orders  from  some  of  the  superior  ministers  of  the  tribunal, 
drawn  up  the  charges  against  Mendizabal,  all  of  which  had  been 
made  at  his  own  discretion.45 

In  the  meantime  the  warmest  affection  had  developed  between 
Penalosa  and  Father  Freytas.  Soon  after  his  arrival,  Freytas 
said  in  a  sermon  that  God  had  brought  Penalosa  to  take  the 
church  out  of  the  power  of  a  heretic.46.  Freytas  served  as  the 
governor's  confessor  and  lived  and  dined  regularly  with  him,47 
the  two  playing  cards  in  the  government  building  to  while 
away  the  time.48  That  Penalosa,  Freytas,  and  Guebara  main- 
tained concubines  was  public  scandal.49  At  the  same  time  so 
great  was  the  hatred  of  Father  Freytas  for  Mendizabal  that  he 
went  from  house  to  house  to  ask  that  no  one  knead  bread  for 
him  or  his  wife ;  in  some  instances  he  even  forbade,  and  threat- 
ened with  evil,  any  one  who  did  so.50 

Even  before  the  arrest  of  Mendizabal  by  Penalosa,  the  latter 
had  been  planning  an  expedition  to  the  Moqui  provinces  in  what 
is  now  northeastern  Arizona,  and  not  to  the  plains  of  Kansas, 
as  the  following  facts  will  show.  On  Thursday  before  the 
second  Sunday  in  Lent,  Father  Posadas  was  in  Santa  Fe,  where 
he  expressed  his  intention  of  preaching  in  the  church  of  the 
villa  on  the  following  Sunday.  The  next  day,  Friday,  Father 
Freytas,  the  guardian  of  the  villa,  informed  Father  Posadas  that 
Penalosa  "had  ordered  him  to  sing  a  mass  on  Saturday  and  to 
uncover  the  holy  sacrament,  to  the  end  that  he,  the  governor, 
might  have  a  happy  journey  while  on  an  expedition  which  he 
was  going  to  make  to  the  province  of  Moqui. 9 ' 51 

45  <  <  Primera  audiencia  de  Mendizabal, ' '  f .  24 ;    ' '  Declaration  de  Don  Bernardo 
Lopez  de  Mendizabal,  Mexico,  Abril  28  de  1663, ' '  in  Causa  contra  Penalosa,  p.  1. 

46  <  <  Deposieion  de  Teresa  Aguilera  Roche,  muger  de  Mendizabal,  Octubre  5,  1663, ' ' 
Hid.,  p.  3. 

47  "Primera  audiencia  de  Mendizabal, "  f.  265. 

48 ' '  Testificacion  de  Eodrigo  Rubin,  Agosto  3  de  1663, ' '  in  Causa  contra  Penalosa, 
p.  3. 

«  "Audiencia  de  Diciembre  11  de  1665,"  ibid.,  p.  20;  "Declaracion  de  algunas 
cosas  por  Penalosa,"  ibid.,  p.  30;  "Primera  audiencia  de  Mendizabal,"  f.  179. 

so  '  <  Deposieion  de  Teresa  Aguilera  Roche,  muger  de  Mendizabal,  Octubre  5,  1663, ' ' 
in  Causa  contra  Penalosa,  p.  3. 

6i '  <  Carta  de  Fray  Alonzo  de  Posadas,  al  Tribunal,  conversion  de  los  Mansos, 
Mayo  24  de  1662,"  ibid.,  p.  5. 


Vol.  vi,  NO.  3  j)on  Dieo  de  penaiosa  323 


Father  Freytas  carried  out  the  governor  's  instructions  to  the 
letter.  For  the  service  Penaiosa  entered  on  horseback  as  far  as 
the  high  altar  of  the  church  Notwithstanding  this  unusual  pro- 
ceeding, Father  Freytas  ordered  the  ceremony  performed,  and 
not  only  gave  Penaiosa  the  sacrament  to  kiss  but  he  himself 
placed  the  sacrament  on  Penaiosa  's  head,  "to  the  horror  and 
scandal  of  all  the  settlers."  Freytas  excused  such  conduct  on 
the  ground  that  a  similar  ceremony  had  been  held  for  the  Duke 
of  Albuquerque.  Father  Posadas,  however,  not  only  disap- 
proved of  the  occurrence  but  promptly  reported  it  to  the  tribu- 
nal of  the  inquisition.52 

Some  time  after  the  imprisonment  of  Mendizabal  —  which  was 
just  before  Easter  week  —  and  the  first  day  of  April,  1662,  Pena- 
iosa with  twenty  picked  soldiers  left  Santa  Fe  for  the  Moqui 
pueblos,  distant  about  one  hundred  leagues  to  the  west.53  As 
Easter  in  1662  fell  on  March  30,5*  the  date  of  Penaiosa  's  depar- 
ture was  probably  between  the  twentieth  and  the  last  day  of 
March.  At  any  rate  he  had  departed  for  Moqui  by  April  1, 
1662.55  This  and  other  facts  to  be  noted  later  proved  conclu- 
sively that  Penaiosa  did  not  set  out  for  Quivira  in  March,  1662, 
and  that  the  Freytas  '  l  Eelacion,  '  '  which  was  presented  to  Louis 
xrv  in  1684  as  authority  for  this  alleged  expedition,  is  a  fabri- 
cation. For,  according  to  that  "Relation,"  Penaiosa,  accom- 
panied by  Fathers  Freytas  and  Guebara  and  some  eighty  civil- 
ians, in  addition  to  a  large  force  of  Indians,  was  marching 
during  the  months  of  March,  April,  May,  and  part  of  June  from 
Santa  Fe  to  Quivira  and  the  "Mischipi"  river.56 

Among  those  who  accompanied  Penaiosa  on  his  expedition  to 


<  '  Declaracion  de  Don  Bernardo  Lopez  de  Mendizabal,  Mexico,  Abril  28 
de  1663,"  ibid.,  p.  2;  "Primera  audiencia  de  Mendizabal,"  f.  207. 

53  <  <  Carta  de  Fray  Alonzo  de  Posadas  al  Tribunal,  conversion  de  los  Mansos, 
Noviembre  24  de  1662,"  in  Causa  contra  Penaiosa,  p.  6;  "Declaracion  de  Andres 
Posadas  al  Gobernador  Juan  de  Miranda,  1664,"  ibid.,  p.  20. 

5*Whittaker's  almanac  (London,  1918),  73. 

55  Carta    de    Pray    Alonzo    de    Posadas   al    Tribunal,   conversion    de   los  Mansos, 
Noviembre  24  de  1662,"  in  Causa  contra  Penaiosa,  p.  6;   '  '  Declaracion  de  Andres 
Lopez  Zambrano,  Santo  Domingo,  Febrero  20,  1664,"  ibid.,  p.  10. 

56  '  '  Eelacion  del  descubrimiento  del  pais  y  ciudad  de  Quivira,  echo  por  D.  Diego 
Dionisio  de  Penaiosa     .     .     .     escrita  por  el  Padre  Fray  Nicolas  de  Freytas,"  in 
Shea,  Expedition  of  Don  Diego  Dionisio  de  Penaiosa  from  Santa  Fe  to  the  river 
Mischipi  and  Quivira  in  1662,  27  ff.;  also  in  Duro,  Don  Diego  de  Penaiosa,  y  &it 
descubrimiento  del  reino  de  Quivira,  33  ff. 


324  Charles  W.  Hackett  M- v- H- R- 

Moqui  were  Sargento  Mayor  Diego  Romero  and  Alcalde  Mayor 
Nicolas  de  Aguilar,  two  characters  of  the  lowest  type  who  were 
especially  inimical  to  the  religious  of  the  province.57  On  April  1, 
1662,  while  these  two  men  were  absent  with  Penalosa  on  the 
Moqni  expedition,  Father  Posadas  received  a  letter  from  the 
tribunal  of  the  inquisition  containing  orders  for  their  arrest. 
This  letter  was  brought  to  New  Mexico  by  Alguacil  Mayor  Juan 
Manso,  the  predecessor  of  Governor  Mendizabal.58  On  April 
30,  1662,  the  Penalosa  party  arrived  at  Isleta  on  its  return  from 
Moqui.59  At  that  time  Father  Posadas  was  distant  some  eighteen 
leagues  from  Isleta ;  but  being  advised  by  letter  that  Penalosa, 
accompanied  by  Romero  and  Aguilar,  had  arrived  at  the  latter 
pueblo,  he  set  out  posthaste  on  the  morning  of  May  1  for  that 
place,  arriving  about  midnight.  The  next  day,  Father  Posadas, 
in  the  absence  of  General  Manso,  arrested  both  Romero  and 
Aguilar.60  Penalosa,  meanwhile,  had  gone  on  to  Santa  Fe,  but 
he  was  promptly  advised  of  the  arrests  by  one  of  his  lieutenants. 
Posadas  by  this  time  had  crossed  the  river  on  a  raft  and  secretly 
made  his  way  to  Santo  Domingo,  fifteen  leagues  above  Isleta, 
where  Romero  and  Aguilar  and  two  other  prisoners  were  incar- 
cerated in  the  cells  of  the  monastery.61 

Having  secured  his  prisoners,  Father  Posadas  set  about  to 
prevent,  as  he  claims  to  have  done  in  the  cases  of  other  arrests, 
any  one  from  taking  over  their  encomiendas,  for  he  knew  full 
well,  he  said,  "that  the  governor  wanted  to  take  them  over." 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  as  soon  as  Penalosa  was  advised  of  the 
arrest  of  Romero  and  Aguilar,  he  sent  to  have  their  weapons 
and  other  property  collected  for  himself.  Father  Posadas,  how- 

57  "Declaration  de  Diego  Romero,  ano  de  1663,"  in  Causa  contra  Aguilar,  f.  66. 

ss  « <  Carta  de  Fray  Alonzo  de  Posadas  al  Tribunal,  conversion  de  los  Mansos, 
Noviembre  24  de  1662,"  in  Causa  contra  Penalosa,  p.  6;  ' '  Testificacion  de  Don 
Juan  Manso,  Mexico,  13  de  Enero  de  1661r"  in  Segundo  guaderno  a  Mendizabal, 
f.  46;  "Carta  de  Fray  Alonzo  de  Posadas  al  Tribunal,  Santo  Domingo,  Junio  1  de 
1662, ' '  in  Causa  contra  Aguilar,  f .  74  ff . 

5»  l < Testimonio  de  Fray  Salvador  de  Guerra,  Junio  13,  1662,"  ibid.,  80;  "Carta 
de  Fray  Alonzo  de  Posadas  al  Tribunal,  conversion  de  los  Mansos,  Noviembre  24  de 
1662,"  in  Causa  contra  Penalosa,  p.  6;  ' '  Deelaracion  de  Diego  Romero,  Mexico, 
Mayo  5  de  1663,"  ibid.,  p.  3;  "Deposition  de  Teresa  Aguilera  Roche,  muger  de 
Mendizabal,  Octubre  5,  1663,"  ibid.t  p.  3. 

eo  "  Testimonio  de  Fray  Salvador  de  Guerra,  Junio  13  de  1662,"  in  Causa  contra 
Aguilar,  f.  80. 

si  Hid.,  81. 


. 

Vol.  vi,  NO.  3  DOH,  Diego  de  Penalosa  325 

ever,  issued  orders  in  the  name  of  the  inquisition  for  Penalosa's 
alcalde  mayor  not  to  take  over  the  encomiendas.  Thwarted  in 
his  intentions,  Penalosa  was  deeply  offended  and  at  once  insti- 
tuted proceedings  to  get  possession  of  the  property,  at  the  same 
time  making  complaint  as  to  the  competency  of  Father  Posadas' 
jurisdiction  as  comisario  of  the  holy  inquisition.62 

In  the  meantime  Father  Posadas  had  gone  to  the  Mansos  mis- 
sions in  the  present  El  Paso  region,  and  from  there,  on  May  24, 
he  safely  wrote  a  letter  to  the  tribunal  advising  it  of  Penalosa 's 
action.  Eight  days  later  he  was  again  in  Santo  Domingo.63 
Two  weeks  after  this,  Penalosa,  while  at  Isleta  —  whither  he  had 
gone  to  be  present  at  the  baptism  of  a  goddaughter  —  wrote  a 
letter  to  Father  Posadas  full  of  accusations  against  the  religious 
and  the  inquisition.64  The  letter  in  question  was  written  on  June 
16,  1662.  This  is  further  proof  that  Penalosa  did  not  make  an 
expedition  to  Quivira  in  1662,  for  it  was  just  five  days  prior  to 
the  date  of  this  letter,  according  to  the  '  *  Relacion ' J  bearing  the 
name  of  Father  Freytas,  that  Penalosa  and  his  party  began  to 
retrace  their  steps  from  the  wonderful  city  of  Gran  Quivira  to 
Santa  Fe.65  Clearly  the  "Relacion"  was  entirely  fictitious. 

Whether  or  not  Father  Freytas  brought  an  order  from  the  in- 
quisition calling  for  the  arrest  of  Mendizabal  in  the  name  of  that 
body,  no  such  order  was  carried  out.  On  August  19,  1662,  how- 
ever, Father  Posadas  received  specific  instructions  from  the 
tribunal  to  arrest  both  Mendizabal  and  his  wife.  The  order  was 
brought  from  Mexico  by  one  Diego  Gonzalez  Lobon,  who  first 
reported  to  the  governor  and  then,  accompanied  by  Father  Frey- 
tas, carried  the  order  to  Father  Posadas  at  Santo  Domingo.  As 
soon  as  he  read  the  order,  Father  Posadas  realized  that  to  arrest 
Mendizabal  for  the  tribunal  would  cause  trouble,  since  the  latter 

62  ' l  Carta  de  Fray  Alonzo  de  Posadas  al  Tribunal,  conversion  de  los  Mansos,  Mayo 
24  de  1662,"  in  Causa  contra  Penalosa,  p.  5;  "  Carta  de  Fray  Alonzo  de  Posadas  al 
Tribunal,  conversion  de  los  Mansos,  Noviembre  24  de  1662,"  ibid.,  p.  6. 

63  <  <  Carta   de   Fray  Alonzo   de  Posadas  al  Tribunal,   conversion   de   los  Mansos, 
Mayo  24  de  166(2,"  ibid.,  p.  5;  "Carta  de  Fray  Alonzo  de  Posadas  al  Tribunal,  Santo 
Domingo,  Junio  1  de  1662,"  in  Causa  contra  Aguilar,  f.  74  ff. 

e*  "Carta  de  Diego  de  Penalosa,  al  custodio,  Ysleta,  Junio  16  de  1662,"  in 
Causa  contra  Penalosa,  p.  6. 

65  ' '  Relacion  del  descubrimiento  del  pais  y  ciudad  de  Quivira,  echo  por  D.  Diego 
Dionisio  de  Penalosa, ' '  in  Shea,  Expedition  of  Don  Diego  Dionisio  de  Penalosa  from 
Santa  Fe  to  the  river  Mischipi  and  Quivira  in  1662,  40;  and  in  Duro,  Don  Diego  de 
Penalosa,  y  su  descubrimiento  del  reino  de  Quivira,  39. 


326  Charles  W.  Hackett  M-  v.  H.  E. 

was  still  Penalosa's  prisoner.  For  this  reason  Posadas  advised 
"the  governor's  best  friend,"  Father  Freytas,  "cautiously  and 
carefully"  to  ask  Penalosa  to  remove  the  guards,  as  he  "had  an 
imperative  duty  to  perform."  Freytas  returned  to  Santa  Fe; 
shortly  afterward,  instead  of  being  removed,  the  guards  about 
Mendizabal  were  commanded  under  penalty  of  death  not  to  allow 
any  one,  no  matter  what  his  quality  or  condition,  to  take  the  ex- 
governor  from  his  prison.66  For  some  part  in  this  action,  Frey- 
tas was  suspected  by  Father  Posadas. 

Nevertheless,  on  August  26,  1662,  Father  Posadas  formally 
arrested  Mendizabal.  About  the  end  of  September  or  the  be- 
3  ginning  of  October  of  that  year,  Mendizabal,  a  prisoner  of 
previously  been  seized  by  Penalosa.68  This  move  infuriate 
Penalosa,  and  from  that  time  he  persecuted  the  comisario  of  the 
inquisition  in  every  way  possible;  he  made  inquiry  into  all 
the  movements  of  Posadas,  and  made  efforts  to  have  laid  before 
him  all  that  the  latter  was  doing  in  the  name  of  the  tribunal.69 
Thus  the  contest  arising  over  the  attachment  of  the  encomiendas 
of  Romero,  Aguilar,  and  Mendizabal  marked  the  beginning  of  a 
long  struggle  between  Father  Posadas,  on  the  one  hand,  and  the 
governor,  supported  by  Fathers  Freytas  and  Guebara,  on  the 
attached  in  behalf  of  the  tribunal  the  latter 's  estate,  which 
inquisition,  left  Santa  Fe  for  Mexico  City,  where,  on  April  9, 
1663,  he  was  incarcerated  in  the  secret  prison  by  the  inquisition 
authorities.67  Father  Posadas  had  checkmated  Governor  Pena-.  -' 

At  the  same  time  Father  Posadas  arrested  Mendizabal,  he 
losa  a  second  time. 

66  < '  Carta  de   Fray  Alonzo  de  Posadas  al  Tribunal,  conversion  de  los  Mansos, 
Noviembre  24  de  1662, ' '  in  Causa  contra  Penalosa,  p.  6. 

67  <  <  Declaracion   de  Don   Bernardo   Lopez    de  Mendizabal,  Mexico,  Abril  28   de 
1663,"  ibid.,  p.  1;  "Primera  audiencia  de  Mendizabal,"  ff.  2,  110.     Mendizabal 's 
trial  was  concluded  in  March,  1664.     At  the  time  Mendizabal  was  critically  ill;  he 
died  in  prison  on  September  16,  1664.     On  April  17,  1671,  the  inquisitors  voted 
' '  that  the  memory  of     ...     Mendizabal  should  be  absolved  from  the  odium  of  the 
judgment,  and  that  it  should  be -declared  and  ordered  that  his  body  should  be  ex- 
humed and  his  bones     .     .     .    placed  in  ecclesiastical  burial. ' '     Ibid.,  ff.  294,  301. 

6s  <  <  Declaracion  de  Andres  Lopez  de  Zambrano,  Santo  Domingo,  Febrero  20  de 
16(54, ' '  in  Causa  contra  Penalosa,  p.  11 ;  ' '  Carta  de  Fray  Alonzo  de  Posadas  al  Trib- 
unal, Enero  3  de  1664,"  ibid.,  p.  9. 

69  Ibid. ;  ' '  Carta  de  Fray  Antonio  de  Ybargaray  al  Tribunal,  Galisteo,  Octubre  1 
de  1663, ' '  in  Causa  contra  Penalosa,  p.  7. 


Vol.  VI,  NO.  3  j)on  Dieg0  de  Penalosa  327 

other,  over  the  general  question  of  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction.70 
In  the  long  run  Penalosa,  notwithstanding  the  sequestration  of 
encomiendas  and  the  confiscation  of  their  rents  by  the  tribunal 
of  the  inquisition,  actually  did  collect  for  himself  the  revenue 
from  several,  including  that  of  Romero.71  In  at  least  two  in- 
stances the  tributes  were  thus  illegally  collected  for  Penalosa  by 
Father  Freytas.72  In  the  case  of  Bomero's  encomienda,  Pena- 
losa tried  to  make  it  appear  that  he  had  given  it  in  trust  to  an- 
other immediately  after  Romero's  arrest.  As  a  matter  of  fact 
he  delayed  the  actual  transfer  of  the  encomienda  until  just  be- 
fore leaving  New  Mexico.73 

7<>"Carta  de  Fray  Alonso  de  Posadas  al  Tribunal  .  .  .  Mayo  24  de  1662," 
ibid.,  p.  5 ;  ' '  Carta  de  Fray  Alonzo  de  Posadas  al  Tribunal,  Enero  3  de  1664, ' '  ibid., 
p.  9;  "Deposicion  de  Teresa  Aguilera  Eoche,  muger  de  Mendizabal,  Octubre  5, 
1663,"  ibid.,  p.  3. 

According  to  one  declarant,  Fathers  Freytas  and  Guebara  "were  great  friends  of 
Don  Diego  de  Penalosa  and  both  eulogized  him  in  the  sermons  which  they  preached; 
they  also  praised  his  actions  excessively  in  indirect  words,  and  vituperated  those  of 
their  prelate  ...  all  their  declarations  being  animated  by  the  attachment  which 
the  comisario  had  laid  on  the  estate  which  Don  Diego  de  Penalosa  was  taking  for  his 
own  when  it  was  not  his. "  f<  Declaracion  de  Juana  Alvizu,  estancia  de  San  Nicolas, 
Sandia,  Marzo  26,  1664,"  ibid.,  p.  18.  According  to  another  declarant,  Father 
Freytas,  during  Lent  of  1663,  preached  two  sermons  against  Father  Posadas,  the  lat- 
ter being  referred  to  as  "Caiaphas"  and  "Judas."  "Deposicion  de  Fray  Bernardo 
Lopez  de  Covarrubias,  guardian  de  San  Marcos,  Enero  17  de  1664,"  ibid.,  p.  17. 

71  "  Declaracion  del  Capitan  Cristoval  Duran  y  Chavez,  Marzo  9,  1664,"  ibid.,  p. 
17;  ' ' Eatificacion  de  Martin  Serrano,"  ibid.,  p.  15;  "Declaracion  de  Juana  Alvizu, 
estancia  de  San  Nicolas,  Sandia,  Marzo  14  de  1664,"  ibid.,  p.  18, 

Penalosa,  "with  reference  to  the  encomiendas  of  Francisco  Gomez  and  Diego 
Eomero,  sent  an  order  for  the  entire  quota  of  October  of  the  year  1662  to  be  collected 
in  the  town  of  Pecos,  as  was  done;  when  the  clothing  pertaining  to  this  encomienda 
was  brought  to  the  defendant,  he  kept  it,  not  turning  it  over  to  any  trustee  whatever. 
This  clothing  consisted  of  nineteen  manias  of  cotton,  forty-four  pieces  of  cloth,  sixty- 
six  chamois  skins,  and  twenty-one  white  buckskins,  eighteen  buffalo  skins,  and  six- 
teen large  buckskins.  In  the  year  1663  half  of  the  tribute  was  collected  in  the 
same  manner  in  that  town  in  the  month  of  April.  It  consisted  of  twenty-nine  large 
chamois  skins,  forty-two  pieces  of  cloth,  twelve  buffalo  skins,  twelve  white  buckskins, 
and  seven  large  ones.  .  ."  "Audiencia  del  3  de  Julio  de  1665,"  ibid.,  p.  25. 

72  ' ( Eatificacion  de  Martin  Serrano, ' '  ibid.,  p.  15. 

73 "  Declaraeion  del  Capitan  Cristoval  Duran  y  Chavez,  Marzo  9,  1664,"  ibid., 
p.  17. 

"Not  only  did  the  defendant  [Penalosa]  do  as  has  been  said  with  regard  to  the 
encomiendas  of  the  prisoners,  but  he  made  a  practice  of  anticipating  the  collections, 
receiving  seven  hundred  and  twenty-two  pieces  valued  at  one  peso  each  in  collections 
from  the  revenues  belonging  to  Francisco  Gomez,  and  one  hundred  and  eighteen 
pieces  of  the  same  value  from  the  revenues  belonging  to  Diego  Eomero  .  .  .  and 


328  Charles  W.  Hackett  M.  v.  H.  E. 

This  question  of  the  sequestration  of  encomiendas  in  cases 
where  the  encomenderos  were  arrested  by  the  tribunal  of  the 
inquisition  was  generally  recognized  at  the  time  as  the  primary, 
though  it  was  not  the  only,  cause  for  friction  between  Peiialosa 
and  Father  Posadas.74  One  of  the  most  serious  disputes  con- 
nected with  the  whole  subject  of  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  arose 
in  the  following  way.  Don  Pedro  Duran  y  Chavez,  lieutenant- 
general  of  the  province,  was  arrested  by  order  of  Penalosa  and 
was  being  carried  in  chains  to  Santa  Fe,  when  he  escaped  from 
his  guard  and  sought  asylum  in  the  church  at  Santo  Domingo. 
As  soon  as  he  was  advised  of  this,  Penalosa  sent  soldiers  to 
Santo  Domingo,  who,  on  Sunday,  August  23, 1663,  after  demand- 
ing the  keys  and  being  refused  them,  forcibly  took  the  refugee 
from  the  church.75  Claiming  that  he  had  authority  from  the 
pontiff  to  do  so,  Father  Posadas  promptly  threatened  to  excom- 
municate Penalosa  unless  Don  Pedro  was  returned  within  twenty- 
four  hours  to  the  church  in  which  he  had  sought  refuge.  There- 
upon Penalosa  replied  that  with  all  due  respect  to  the  pontiff  he 
would  arrest  Father  Posadas,  and  this  he  promptly  set  about  to 
do.76 

On  Sunday,  the  last  day  of  September,  1663,  after  all  neces- 
sary precautions  had  been  taken  to  safeguard  the  undertaking, 
Penalosa  placed  himself  at  the  head  of  twelve  mounted  and 
armed  citizens  of  Santa  Fe  and  set  out  for  the  nearby  pueblo  of 

he  delayed  the  transfer  of  the  title  until  the  time  when  he  was  about  to  come  to 
New  Spain. "  "Audiencia  del  3  de  Julio  de  1665, "  ibid.,  p.  25.  After  his  imprison- 
ment Penalosa  claimed  that  the  tributes  were  always  collected  in  halves,  except  for 
one  year,  and  that  the  part  thereof  which  belonged  to  the  royal  fise  was  paid  to  the 
parish  priests  or  to  the  persons  whom  the  comisario  himself  designated.  He  also 
claimed  that  he  had  reported  his  action  to  the  tribunal,  the  viceroy,  and  the  audiencia. 
"Bespuesta  de  Diego  de  Penalosa,"  ibid.,  p.  26.  No  corroboratory  evidence  for 
these  statements  was  submitted. 

74"Carta  de  Fray  Alonzo  de  Posadas  al  Tribunal,  Enero  3  de  1664,"  in  Causa 
contra  Penalosa,  p.  9;  "Carta  de  Fray  Antonio  de  Ybargaray  al, Tribunal,  Galisteo, 
Octubre  1  de  1663,"  ibid.,  p.  7;  * '  Eequerimiento  de  Euiz  de  Zepeda  al  Tribunal,  Mex- 
ico, Febrero  7  de  1664,"  ibid.,  p.  8. 

75  <  <  Peticion  4  inf  orme  de  Posadas  al  Gobernador  Juan  de  Miranda,  1664, ' '  in 
Causa  contra  Penalosa,  p.  ,20;  "Declaracion  de  Fray  Gabriel  de  Torija,  Santo 
Domingo,  Junio  3,  1664,"  ibid.,  p.  15. 

76/fctd.;  "Deposicion  de  Teresa  Aguilera  Eoche,  muger  de  Mendizabal,  Octubre 
5,  1663,"  ibid.,  p.  4;  "Carta  de  Fray  Antonio  de  Ybargaray  al  Tribunal,  Galisteo, 
Octubre  1  de  1663,"  ibid.,  p.  7. 


Vol.  vi,  NO.  3  j)on  Dieg0  de  Penalosa  329 

Pecos,77  the  doctrina  at  that  time  administered  by  Father  Posa- 
das. At  an  unseasonable  hour  that  night,  while  Father  Posadas 
was  walking  up  and  down  the  corridor  reciting  the  rosary,  Pena- 
losa entered.  Indulging  in  the  most  undignified  personalities, 
Penalosa  charged  Father  Posadas  with  having  tried  to  instigate 
a  revolt  in  the  province,  and  chided  him  for  not  having,  from  the 
standpoint  of  his  own  interest,  tried  to  serve  the  governor's 
pleasure,  "  instead  of  dealing  with  attachments  by  the  inquisi- 
tion. ' ' 7S  Father  Posadas  was  then  placed  under  arrest  by  Pena- 
losa and  carried  to  Santa  Fe.  There  the  priest  was  locked  up  in 
one  of  the  rooms  of  the  governor 's  palace,  the  window  was  closed 
with  adobe  and  pieces  of  timber,  guards  were  placed  outside  the 
room,  and  two  pieces  of  artillery  were  loaded  and  trained  on  the 
principal  door  of  the  hall  leading  to  the  plaza.79  In  this  way  did 
Peiialosa  safeguard  against  any  possible  demonstration. 

The  arrest  of  the  father  comisario  created  consternation 
among  both  laymen  and  ecclesiastics,  who  alike  pronounced  it  an 
unprecedented  act.  At  Pecos,  Father  Nicolas  Enriquez  ordered 
that  the  sacrament  should  be  consumed  forthwith,  for  he  feared 

77  About  eighteen  miles  southeast  of  Santa  Fe.     Note  by  Hodge,  in  Benavides, 
Memorial  of  1630  (Ayer  tr.),  278. 

78  < '  Carta  de  Fray  Alonzo  de  Posadas  al  Tribunal,  Enero  3  de  1664, ' '  in  Causa 
contra  Penalosa,  p.  9. 

79 ' '  Carta  de  Fray  Antonio  de  Ybargaray  al  Tribunal,  Galisteo,  Octubre  1  de 
1663, ' '  ibid.,  p.  7 ;  "  Carta  de  Fray  Nicolas  Henriquez  a  Fray  Antonio  de  Ybargaray, 
Santa  Fe,  Octubre  1  de  1663,"  ibid.,  p.  8;  "Carta  de  Fray  Alonzo  de  Posadas  al 
Tribunal,  Enero  3  de  1664,"  ibid.,  p.  9;  "Declaracion  de  Fray  Thomas  de  Alvarado, 
convento  de  San  Diego  de  las  Jemez, "  ibid.,  p.  10;  ' '  Declaracion  de  Andres  Lopez 
Zambrano,  Santo  Domingo,  Febrero  20  de  1664,"  ibid.,  p.  10;  "Declaracion  de  Fray 
Nicolas  Enriquez,  Mayo  1664,  Santa  Fe, "  ibid.y  p.  12;  "Declaracion  de  Fray  Gabriel 
de  Torija,  Santo  Domingo,  Junio  3  de  1664,"  ibid.,  p.  15. 

When  Father  Posadas  protested  against  this  outrage,  Penalosa  is  reported  to  have 
said  that,  being  governor  and  captain-general,  he  was  superior  to  the  office  of  the 
tribunal ;  that  the  only  court  which  he  had  to  obey  was  the  royal  audiencia ;  but  that 
when  it  sent  him  orders  he  would  do  what  seemed  good  to  him,  for  he  was  superior  in 
all  things.  At  the  same  time  Penalosa  said :  ' '  They  murmur  against  me  because 
I  have  my  lady  friend  in  a  house;  this  is  true,  and  I  brought  her  here.  She  has  a 
seat  in  the  church  in  the  most  important  and  conspicuous  place  of  all.  She  is  the 
mother  of  my  daughter  and  is  my  friend,  and  well  deserves  to  be  put  in  a  guilded 
tabernacle  of  crystal.  .  .  In  my  country  (Peru)  I  was  a  cleric,  a  Father,  and  I 
married  when  I  was  ordained  as  subdeacon,  and  I  sang  and  intoned  nicely  a  gloria, 
a  credo,  and  a  prefacio"  (that  part  of  the  mass  which  precedes  the  canon).  "De- 
posicion  de  Teresa  Aguilera  Roche,  muger  de  Mendizabal,  Octubre  5,  1663,"  ibid., 
p.  4. 


330  Charles  W.  Hackett  M.  v.  H.  B. 

some  forward  or  contemptuous  act  from  Penalosa,  who  had  al- 
ready threatened  to  kill  him.80  At  Santa  Fe,  the  guardian  closed 
the  church,  ordered  the  sacrament  consumed,  called  upon  the 
other  churches  throughout  the  province  to  do  likewise,  and  ex- 
pressed a  determination  to  retaliate  with  an  interdict.81  The 
whole  proceeding  caused  "  great  confusion  and  scandal  among 
both  Spaniards  and  natives,  and  if  the  situation  had  endured 
much  longer  most  of  the  people  would  have  gone  from  the  villa 
to  the  mountains,  because  the  affair  was  a  thing  never  before 
seen  nor  heard  of  in  the  kingdom. " 82 

Soon  after  the  imprisonment  of  Father  Posadas,  Penalosa  was 
approached  by  two  religious,  who  came  to  ask  that  the  father 
comisario  be  released ;  the  governor  replied  that  he  was  going  to 
send  him  to  his  superiors  "as  a  covetous  person  and  a  disturber 
of  the  peace.  "83  Later,  while  talking  with  other  religious  and 
some  laymen,  Penalosa  caused  it  to  be  understood  that  he  was 
1  'weighed  down,  perplexed,  and  exhausted "  on  account  of  hav- 
ing arrested  Father  Posadas.  The  following  day,  October  7, 
1663,  after  a  long  conference  in  the  room  in  which  Father  Posa- 
das was  a  prisoner,  the  seven  religious  present  agreed  with 
Penalosa  that  they  should  take  an  oath  of  secrecy  concerning  the 
affair.  A  statement  was  then  drawn  up,  sealed,  and  left  with 
the  governor,  after  which  Penalosa  accompanied  Father  Posa- 
das to  the  door  and  set  him  at  liberty.84 

so « Declaracion  de  Fray  Nicolas  Enriquez,  Mayo  1664,  Santa  Fe,M  in  Causa 
contra  Penalosa,  p.  12. 

si  <  <  Carta  de  Fray  Nicolas  Henriquez  a  Fray  Antonio  de  Ybargaray,  Santa  Fe, 
Octubre  1,  1663,"  ibid.,  p.  8. 

82  <  *  Declaracion  de  Andres  Lopez  Zambrano,  Febrero  20  de  1664, ' '  iUd.,  p.  12. 

83  <*  Declaracion   de  Fray   Thomas  de  Alvarado,   convento   de  San  Diego  de  los 
Jemes,  Noviembre  12  de  1663, ' '  ibid.,  p.  10. 

s* "  Declaracion  de  Fray  Bias  de  Herrera  del  convento  de  Hemes,  Julio  12  de 
1663, ' '  ibid.,  p.  9 ;  "  Peticion  e  inf orme  de  Posadas  al  Gobernador  Juan  de  Miranda, 
1664, M  ibid.,  p.  20.  The  arrest  of  Father  Posadas  is  mentioned  in  the  autobio- 
graphical sketch  of  Penalosa  published  by  Margry  and  Shea.  There  it  is  stated 
that:  "The  commissary-general  of  the  Inquisition  assumed  a  boundless  authority 
and  wished  to  dispose  sovereignly  of  everything;  so  that,  to  check  his  tyrannical  and 
extravagant  enterprise,  he  (Penalosa)  was  compelled  to  arrest  him  as  a  prisoner  for 
a  week  in  a  chamber  of  the  palace,  after  which  he  set  him  at  liberty,  in  the  hope  that 
he  would  be  more  moderate  in  the  future. ' '  "  Notice  sur  le  Comte  de  Penalosa, ' '  in 
Margry,  Decouvertes  et  etablissements  des  Frangais,  3:42;  English  translation  in 
Shea,  Expedition  of  Don  Diego  Diomsio  de  Pefralosa,  from,  Santa  Fe  to  the  river. 
Mischipi  and  Quivira  in  1662,  11.  See  also  Houck,  History  of  Missouri,  1:  140. 


Vol.  vi,  NO.  3  j)on  Diego  de  Penalosa  331 

Despite  the  desire  and  efforts  of  Penalosa  to  hush  up  the  mat- 
ter of  the  arrest  of  Father  Posadas,  the  news  in  due  time  reached 
the  tribunal  of  the  inquisition  in  Mexico  City.  On  February  7, 
1664,  formal  recommendations  were  made  to  that  body  by  the 
fiscal,  Ruiz  de  Zepeda,  calling  for  the  arrest  of  Penalosa,  the 
attachment  of  his  property,  and  the  sale  of  a  sufficient  part  of  it 
to  pay  the  guards  who  should  bring  him  a  prisoner  to  the  capital, 
it  being  held  that  * i  any  less  a  demonstration  would  not  be  fitting 
retribution  for  such  unmeasured  impudence. ' '  At  the  same  time 
the  fiscal  introduced  autos  against  Fathers  Nicolas  de  Freytas 
and  Miguel  de  Guebara.85 

In  the  meantime  Penalosa  had  apparently  seen  the  handwrit- 
ing on  the  wall.  About  the  end  of  February,  or  the  beginning  of 
March,  1664,  he  left  New  Mexico.  With  him  in  his  carriage  rode 
his  concubine,  who  had  lived  in  the  palace  with  him ;  before  them 
Penalosa  caused  the  royal  standard  to  be  carried  unfurled. 
Pains  were  taken,  however,  to  avoid  passing  through  the  town 
of  Santo  Domingo,  where  Father  Posadas  was  at  the  time.86 

In  his  autobiographical  sketch  it  appears  that  Penalosa  "  re- 
turned to  Mexico  by  the  ordinary  route  of  Parral,  where  he  spent 
three  and  a  half  months."87  As  six  months  was  the  ordinary 
time  required  for  a  carriage  journey  from  Santa  Fe  to  Mexico 
City,  Penalosa  must  have  tarried  elsewhere  en  route,  for  it  was 
not  until  on  May  17,  1665,  that  he  was  delivered  a  prisoner  to 
the  tribunal  of  the  inquisition.88  A  month  later,  on  June  16, 
formal  complaint  was  made  against  him  as  follows : 

I  denounce  and  bring  criminal  complaint  against  Don  Diego 
Dionisio  de  Penalosa  Briceiip,  who  resides  in  this  city,  and  I  say 
that  ...  he  has  committed  very  serious  crimes,  both  as 
usurper  of  the  jurisdiction  of  this  holy  office,  and  in  having 
obliged  certain  witnesses  who  had  been  examined  in  matters  and 
cases  concerning  the  faith  to  reveal  to  him  what  they  had  testi- 
fied before  the  comisario ;  he  has  also  impeded  the  proper  use 

85 ' <  Kequerimiento  de  Ruiz  de  Zepeda  al  Tribunal,  Mexico,  Febrero  7  de  1664, ' ' 
in  Causa  contra  Penalosa,  p.  9. 

se  < '  Carta  de  Fray  Alonzo  de  Posadas  al  Tribunal,  Enero  3  de  1664, ' '  ibid.,  p.  9 ; 
1 '  Declaracion  de  Andres  Lopez  Zambrano,  Santo  Domingo,  Febrero  20  de  1664," 
ibid.,  p.  10. 

ST  "Notice  sur  le  Comte  de  Penalosa,"  in  Margry,  Decouvertes  et  etablissements 
des  Frangais,  3 :  42 ;  Shea,  Expedition  of  Don  Diego  Dionisio  de  Penalosa  from  Santa 
Fe  to  the  river  Mischipi  and  Quivira  in  1662,  11. 

ss  "Auto  de  racion,  Mexico  Junio  8  de  1665,"  in  Causa  contra  Penalosa,  p.  22. 


332  Charles  W.  Hackett  M.  v.  H.  R. 

and  exercise  of  the  jurisdiction  of  the  court  of  the  inquisition  by 
formally  opposing  the  bull  8i  de  protegendis;  and  because  he 
tried  to  serve  as  an  auxiliary  in  cases  before  the  inquisition,  he 
is  suspected  of  infidelity ;  he  has  also  said  certain  things  which 
are  very  near  being  proof  of  the  error  of  infidelity ;  he  has  also 
been  a  petulant  and  proud  traducer  of  the  tribunal  and  of  its 
ministers.89 

The  same  day,  the  tribunal  demanded  that  he  be  incarcerated 
in  the  secret  prisons,  that  his  possessions  be  attached,  and  that 
a  case  in  matters  of  faith  be  prosecuted  against  him.90 

Penalosa 's  trial  began  with  the  first  hearing  on  June  25,  1665, 
and  on  February  3,  1668,  formal  sentence  was  passed  upon  him. 
In  the  course  of  the  trial  many  crimes  other  than  those  already 
referred  to  were  charged  against  him.  Among  these  were  rape, 
incest,  robbery,  and  the  enslavement  of  Indian  girls.91  Against 
all  these  charges  Penalosa  defended  himself  ably.  He  justified 
his  appointment  of  encomenderos  to  take  the  place  of  those 
whose  property  had  been  attached  by  the  inquisition  on  the 
ground  that  the  encomiendas  were  the  patrimony  of  the  king  and 
that  a  specific  cedula,  issued  by  Viceroy  Escalona,  command- 
ed that  there  should  always  be  exactly  thirty-five  encomenderos. gz 
Eeferring  to  the  ceremony  in  the  church  at  Santa  Fe  prior  to 
his  departure  for  Moqui  in  March,  1662,  Penalosa  said  that  it 
was  for  the  purpose  "of  asking  his  Divine  Majesty  for  the  suc- 
cess of  the  journey  ...  a  journey  in  defense  of  the  Faith, 
and  to  remove  the  abuses  which  had  been  growing  up  ever  since 
the  time  of  the  government  of  Don  Bernardo  Lopez  de  Men- 
dizabal,  namely,  the  non-attendance  of  the  natives  at  the  teach- 
ing of  the  doctrine  and  upon  the  services  of  the  religious. ' ' 93 

sa  "Auto  de  aeusacion.  Presentado  Junio  16  de  1665,"  Causa  contra  Penalosa, 
p.  1. 

so  "Auto  de  prision  de  Penalosa,  Junio  16  de  1665,"  ibid.,  p.  22. 

9i ' '  Audiencia  del  3  de  Julio  de  1665, '  >  ibid.,  p.  25.  « '  The  defendant  violated 
a  certain  person,  having  previously  had  illicit  relations  with  her  two  sisters  whom 
he  also  made  pregnant;  which  shows  how  little  concern  he  had  for  affinities.  .  . " 
It  was  charged  that  the  silver  in  Sonora  which  he  stole  from  Mendizabal  weighed 
"three  hundred  and  ninety-one  and  one  half  marks."  The  defendant  "boasted  of 
his  sensualities,  both  of  ravishment  and  incest,  and  told  how  he  had  made  certain 
persons  pregnant  under  the  promise  that  he  would  assist  them."  Ibid.  As  for  the 
kidnapping  of  the  Indian  girls,  Penalosa  said  that  it  was  "in  order  to  do  them 
good  ...  for  they  were  only  children."  "Audiencia  de  10  de  Diciembre 
1665,"  ibid.,  p.  28. 

92  "Primera  audiencia,  Junio  25  de  1665,"  ibid.t  p.  22. 

»3«Audiencia  del  3  de  Julio  de  1665,"  ibid.,  p.  23. 


Vol.  vi,  NO.  3  j)on  Die0  de  Penalosa  333 


Discussing  the  arrest  of  Father  Posadas,  Penalosa,  at  the 
hearing  of  December  4,  1665,  "said  that  he  is  such  a  great  sinner, 
and  that  he  was  so  passionate  and  so  blind  that,  without  con- 
templating anything  but  the  injury  of  the  father  custodio,  he  re- 
solved to  exile  him  from  the  province  '  '  ;  that  he  had  even  taken 
steps  to  do  so,  but  desisted  because  of  the  disturbance  created 
and  because  Posadas  was  comisario  of  the  inquisition  ;  that 
by  reading  certain  chapters  in  the  Politico,  Indiana  of  Solor- 
zano  94  he  had  been  persuaded  that  he  could  exile  the  comisario  ; 
and  that,  having  discussed  this  matter  with  Father  Nicolas  de 
Freytas,  the  latter  had  assured  him  that  he  had  legal  authority 
to  do.  so.95 

Complaining  that  he  had  been  '  '  governor  and  captain-general 
of  fifty  men  belonging  to  the  off-scourings  of  the  earth  —  mesti- 
zos, mulattoes,  and  foreigners,  "  Penalosa,  in  behalf  of  his  de- 
fense, made  a  statement  of  his  alleged  services  while  governor. 
He  enumerated  the  gifts  which  he  claimed  to  have  made  to  the 
churches  of  New  Mexico  ;  he  cited  instances  where  he  had  pun- 
ished an  Indian  dogmatist  and  a  slayer  of  one  of  the  mission- 
aries ;  he  claimed  to  have  visited  the  forty-two  towns  in  the  prov- 
ince i  '  to  admonish  and  command  the  Indians  to  attend  frequent- 
ly upon  the  teachings  of  the  doctrine  and  divine  worship.  '  '  He 
had  caused  the  Taos  Indians,  "who  had  been  in  revolt  for  twen- 
ty-two years,  and  who  were  living  as  infidels  in  El  Cuartelejo,96 
on  the  Quivira  frontier,'7  two  hundred  leagues  beyond  New  Mex- 
ico,97 to  return  ;  he  had  reduced  to  peace  two  infidel  nations,  the 
Cruzados  and  the  Coninas,  settling  them  in  two  large  towns  in 
the  province  of  Moqui;  he  had  also,  by  his  example,  "made  a 
beginning  of  the  devout  practice  of  kissing  not  only  the  robes  of 
the  priests,  but  their  hands  as  well,  a  thing  which  witless  people 
disdained  to  do."98 

s*  Juan  de  Solorzano  Pereira,  Politico  Indiana  (Madrid,  1629-1639,  1776). 

95«Primera  audiencia,  Junio  25  de  1665,"  in  Causa  contra  Penalosa,  p.  22; 
"Audiencia  de  Diciembre  4  de  1665,"  ibid.,  p.  27;  "Audiencia  de  19  de  Diciembre 
1665,  "ibid.,  p.  27. 

96  The  Taos  Indians  were  brought  back  by  Juan  de  Archuleta,  leader  of  twenty 
Spaniards.     While  living  at  El  Cuartelejo   the  Indians  had  often  gone  to  Quivira 
to  trade.     Escalante,  "Carta,"  in  Land  of  sunshine,  12:  313. 

97  A  gross  exaggeration.    El  Cuartelejo,  according  to  Dunn,  was  doubtless  in  Scott 
county,  Kansas.     William  E.  Dunn,  "Spanish  reaction  against  the  French  advance 
toward  New  Mexico,  1717-1727,"  in  MISSISSIPPI  VALLEY  HISTORICAL  REVIEW,  2:  350. 

98  <  '  Apuntamientos  f  avorables  de  este  conf  esante,  contra  lo  Sozpecha  de  que  esta 


334  Charles  W.  Haclcett  M-  v.  H.  R. 

Penalosa  claimed  also  that  when  he  was  appointed  governor 
he  "was  strictly  charged  to  settle  the  villa  of  Cerralvo,"  per- 
mission for  which  had  already  been  granted.  Many  difficulties 
having  arisen,  he  decided  upon  his  own  responsibility  to  recur 
to  the  pacification  of  Quivira,  and  attempted  to  settle  a  villa  in 
the  midst  of  the  settled  region  named  Atrisco,  this  being  the  best 
site  in  all  New  Mexico.  He  drew  up  an  order  to  this  effect,  and 
twelve  or  fifteen  persons,  who  offered  to  make  the  settlement, 
signed  it  with  him  on  Pedro  Valera  's  farm. ' '  10°  As  the  valley 
of  Atrisco  is  in  the  vicinity  of  modern  Albuquerque,  it  is  clear 
that  Penalosa,  at  this  time,  was  not  referring  to  the  original 
Quivira  of  Coronado  and  Onate.  In  this  connection  it  should  be 
remembered  that  one  of  the  Salinas  pueblos,  lying  to  the  south- 
east of  Santa  Fe,  was  called  Gran  Quivira.101 

Finally,  after  admitting  that,  together  with  Father  Freytas 
and  Father  Guebara,  he  had  intrigued  against  Father  Posadas,102 
Penalosa  besought  the  tribunal  "to  look  upon  him  as  a  man  ex- 
posed to  the  greatest  misery  whom  his  Divine  Majesty  has  at 
times  permitted  to  have  a  great  fall  in  order  to  make  him  know 
in  his  reform  that  the  remedy  is  brought  about  by  His  powerful 
hand.  The  faith  of  the  defendant  in  the  clemency  of  so  holy  a 
tribunal  is  that  he  may  be  granted  it,  and,  being  reborn  to  a  new 
life,  may  persevere  to  the  end  in  compliance  with  the  obligations 
of  a  reformed  Catholic  Christian. " 103 

This  was  on  June  13, 1666.  At  the  same  time  Penalosa  asked 
for  a  surgeon  to  examine  him  and  treat  him.  The  next  day  two 
cuartillas  of  wine  were  ordered  given  him.  Nearly  twenty 
months  later,  on  February  3,  1668,  formal  sentence  was  passed 
upon  Penalosa  as  follows: 

We  must  and  do  command  to  be  reprimanded  severely  in  the 
audience  chamber  of  this  holy  office,  him  who  has  been  accused 
and  testified  against;  and  we  order  that  today,  upon  which  this 

casado, ' '  in  Causa  contra  Penalosa,  p.  28 ;  "  Bespuesta  de  Diego  de  Penalosa,  Mexico, 
Octubre  22  de  1665, »  ibid.,  p.  26. 

99  Cerralvo,  in  Nuevo  Leon,  had  been  founded  by  Luis  de  Carabajal  in  1583.     Bol- 
ton,  Spanish  exploration  in  the  southwest,  1542-17 06,  283. 

100  "  Audiencia  de  Diciembre  11  de  1665,"  in  Causa  contra  Penalosa,  p.  29. 

101  See  L.   Bradford  Prince,   Spanish  mission   churches  of  New   Mexico    (Cedar 
Rapids,  1915),  353  ff. 

102 ' f  Declaracion  de  algnnas  cosas  por  Penalosa,"  in  Causa  contra  Penalosa,  p.  30. 
103  Jfcid,  p.  31. 


vol.  vi,  NO.  3  j)on  Diego  de  Penalosa  335 

our  sentence  is  pronounced,  he  shall  be  brought  forth  for  an 
auto  de  fe  as  a  penitent  present  in  the  body,  without  girdle  or 
hood,  with  a  wax  candle  in  his  hands,  and  that  while  he  is  thus 
standing  this  our  sentence  and  his  deserts  shall  be  read  to  him, 
and  he  shall  then  abjure  the  slight  suspicion  which  is  proven 
against  him  by  the  testimony,  in  which  he  is  found  and  continues 
to  be  slightly  suspected.  Then  shall  follow  the  mass,  which  shall 
be  said  without  his  humiliating  himself,  except  he  do  so  from  the 
time  of  the  recital  of  the  sanctus  until  after  the  most  holy  sac- 
rament is  consumed.  During  the  reprimand  there  shall  be  pres- 
ent the  persons  to  be  designated;  and  the  priest  who  shall  say  the 
mass  shall  offer  the  candle.  And  we  condemn  the  defendant  and 
fine  him  in  the  sum  of  five  hundred  pesos,  which  we  apply  to  the 
chamber  of  the  royal  fisc  of  this  holy  office.  We  also  deprive 
him  perpetually  of  the  right  to  hold  political  or  military  offices, 
and  we  also  exile  him  from  all  these  kingdoms  of  New  Spain  and 
the  Windward  Islands  forever.  And  we  command  that  this  sen- 
tence shall  be  executed  within  thirty  days  following  after  the 
pronouncement  of  sentence.104 

Such  was  the  sentence  which  exiled  Penalosa  from  New  Spain. 
Ten  years  later  he  was  at  thevcourt  of  Louis  xiv,  where  he  passed 
the  rest  of  his  life  in  trying  to  interest  the  grand  monarque  in 
plans  for  attacking  New  Spain.  In  view  of  his  friendly  relations 
with  Father  Freytas  it  is  not  surprising  that  the  latter  was  given 
the  credit  for  the  fictitious  "Relation,"  concerning  which  there 
has  heretofore  been  so  much  speculation.  Nothing  is  available 
that  would  throw  any  light  upon  the  later  career  of  Father  Frey- 
tas or  of  Father  Gruebara,  In  1665  Father  Posadas  was  still 
serving  as  Franciscan  custodio  and  as  comisario  of  the  tribunal 
of  the  inquisition  in  New  Mexico.  Apparently  his  relations  with 
the  new  governor,  Juan  de  Miranda,  were  altogether  cordial. 

CHARLES  W.  HACKETT 
UNIVERSITY  OF  TEXAS 

AUSTIN,  TEXAS  » 

104  < '  Senteneia,  Febrero  3  de  1668, ' '  in  Causa  contra  Penalosa,  p.  32. 


;  . 


. 


